Talk:Beebe Plain

Remove disambig?

If you really want a separate article, why not put the disambiguation at the top "for the town in Vermont see..." etc. and classify this as a stub article. I guess both US and Canada projects and cats. Looks good so far.Student7 (talk) 13:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The article history indicates that there indeed was an article at Beebe Plain covering both sides of this divided village; for reasons unknown, someone moved Beebe Plain to Beebe Plain, Vermont without discussion in 2007 and removed the page's Canadian content to dump it in Stanstead, Quebec (the town to which Beebe and Rock Island were both annexed in 1995). It may be worth looking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive_8#Glenrio, which describes the ghost town of Glenrio, New Mexico and Texas on US Route 66. That page was left as one article but with the naming convention adapted to cover two states. Lloydminster is also one unified article, but its situation is unique in that it's an officially-incorporated municipality crossing a provincial border. Texarkana metropolitan area has both a main (unified) article and individual articles per-state, but is two legally incorporated towns with a mayor for each. Estcourt is split in two. I really don't see a consistent pattern to these, but in some cases a place's only claim to fame is that it is split by a boundary of some sort. Splitting Estcourt means an article exists for a place with only four people, for instance. Ottawa-Hull is a different beast as it's a fairly large town, roughly Calgary-sized, but a little town like Beebe would likely have been only a footnote in the Derby Line, Vermont page were it not partially in Canada. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 16:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

A bit easier to justify when both villages are incorporated. Neither Derby Line-Stanstead nor Beebe are really integrated municipalities. Just two places where villages spontaneously arose. Beebe maybe a little different. But while adjacent villagers may "cooperate" somehow, it is hard to see mutuality there. Different in states/provinces where there is easy flow back and forth of people even if laws are (slightly) different. Student7 (talk) 15:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

It may be "fun" to pretend that this is one village, but is like "pretending" that Derby Line and Stanstead are one village. They are not. They are in two different countries. They have a very separate and very different municipal structure. They are not the same place at all! Like San Diego and Tijuana. It is not "one city!" Student7 (talk) 21:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

How so? In 1789, when this settlement was founded, there was no Dominion of Canada (1867) and the border as we currently know it was surveyed (very inaccurately!) long after the village was settled. The line was put down CanUSA Street by a surveyor's error; the 45⁰N line should nominally be south of Darling Hill Road, Beebe VT. Most of the rest of this boundary is just as inaccurate, and the errors stuck. If you want a US-specific article, there already are two: Beebe Plain, Vermont and Derby Line, Vermont. Go there. No need to hijack this one.

I've also removed Category:Villages in Vermont as that's a soft redirect to Category:Incorporated villages in Vermont - a category which was already removed from the previous version of this article as Beebe VT is not incorporated. K7L (talk) 04:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay. Just so long as people realize that it is, today, two distinct entities. Just as separately-named Derby Line and Stanstead are. Beebe wound up that way by accident. The other was more purposeful. The situation is identical though. Student7 (talk) 18:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

It's not an entity. It's unincorporated. There is therefore no clearly-defined town line, unless one takes the pre-1995 Québec municipality. K7L (talk) 03:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)